ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad v. M/s Sant Vivekanad Educational and Welfare Society, Ghaziabad
Income Tax Appeal No. 344 of 2013 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Revenue appeal dismissed as not maintainable on the recorded low-tax-effect ground; no tax merits adjudicated.
Division Bench · Bharati Sapru · Dinesh Kumar Singh
1. Facts of the case
Counsel for the Department stated that the tax effect in this appeal was below Rs.20,00,000. The Court heard Shri Ashish Agarwal for Revenue and Shri R.R. Agarwal for the respondent. The exact tax effect, assessment year and underlying assessment issue are not stated in the supplied order.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court cited CBDT Circular No.3/2018 dated 11 July 2018 and disposed of the appeal on the stated monetary-limit basis. It did not analyse the assessment merits or discuss the circular’s exceptions. The order’s Rs.20-lakh wording and printed file-number string are recorded as source-specific statements, not adopted as the official High Court threshold.
3. Judicial decision
Income Tax Appeal No. 344 of 2013 was dismissed as not maintainable on the stated low-tax-effect ground.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The dismissal ended Revenue’s appeal on a procedural basis. It did not decide a substantive tax question or affirm the underlying assessment reasoning on its merits. No later restoration, review or compliance finding is contained in this order.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
The order records counsel’s below-Rs.20-lakh statement. Official Circular No.3/2018, paragraph 3 (p.1), specified Rs.50 lakh for High Court appeals and Rs.20 lakh for ITAT appeals. Preserve this discrepancy rather than silently rewriting the original or treating Rs.20 lakh as the general High Court limit. No current threshold or merits conclusion follows from this note.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page order read and visually inspected. Exact original SHA-256 and complete extracted text matched the reviewed source packet. No assessment year, PAN or underlying assessment issue is stated. Later proceedings and current law have not been cleared.
Source SHA-256: 7a4ed949a53e2a1e9ba3c6d295bb7748239de5b30128ac6f7ab9ed7f0ba69e0d
Only provisions expressly identified in this order are recorded. No substantive tax merits or current statutory equivalence is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-19. Later proceedings, compliance and current precedential treatment have not been comprehensively verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.